Question Matching bitmapped meshes to surface tiles.

[Notebook]

I'm trying to replace three surface tiles with bitmapped planes using 3ds Max 5.1.

The scaling and bitmapping matches ok:
http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k207/Notebook_04/P2_Meshes.jpg

The brightness is obviously a problem. The same bitmap is used to make the .dds for the surface tile, as is used in 3ds to fit the plane mesh.
http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k207/Notebook_04/MaxP2_Meshes.jpg
http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k207/Notebook_04/MaxP2_Meshes.jpg

I'm guessing the brightness difference is due to the diffuse mapping on the .3ds mesh?

Is there anyway to match this in 3ds Max, or will I have to adjust the bitmap I use in Max to match the surrounding surface tiles?
The Material setting seems to go away when you apply a bitmap in the matterial editor, so I guess it isn't possible there?

All help appreciated.

N.

---------- Post added 08-02-10 at 08:20 AM ---------- Previous post was 08-01-10 at 10:18 PM ----------

Well, the soulution is a bit easier than I thought! Playing around with the mesh in notepad, I tried adjusting the RGB values for Diffuse and Ambient material specs: as in 3DModel.pdf page 6. Setting to these values:

http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k207/Notebook_04/MeshRGBValues.jpg

N3 is the corrected tile. So thats peak white for Diffuse and Ambient. Have to set both to this value. I'm sure someone will know why both have to be changed,when the mapping is only on the diffuse channell in 3ds Max?

Here is the corrected tile:

http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k207/Notebook_04/P2_Meshes_1.jpg

N.

 

[wehaveaproblem]

Glad you found the solution, was going to suggest exactly what you did.

As a side note to consider... Are you loading the mesh in a base.cfg file or in the scenario file? I ask because Orbiter core renders meshes differently accordingly. You find a better visual finish with a scenario mesh opposed to a base.cfg mesh. You will also find that meshes loaded in a base.cfg file may have strange lighting effect when in the cloud shadow. I found that no matter what I did to the material I couldn't get round this problem with WIN. It's not the end of the world, it's just a thing I noticed on my terrain meshes.

Also, it may be worth considering extending the mesh a bit further, but having that extra margin use transparency alpha to fade out the mesh texture, to guarantee a smooth transition from mesh to floor tile.

All that aside, it's looking good!

 

[Notebook]

Thanks wehaveaproblem, at the moment, the meshes are in the .cfg, but thats just for alignment wrt to neighbouring tiles.
The plan(hah!) is for that odd shaped area to the South of the LPADs to be a seperate mesh, then it will be blended over those three surface tiles. Probably using the Alpha mask you suggest.

The mesh will be based on this:
http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k207/Notebook_04/WestcottP2.jpg

Thats the P2 engine test cell at what was Westcott RPE(Rocket Propulsion Establishment). It will have to be a scn. mesh as it will be UMMU and UCGO compatable, with animations. Have a guess what is likely to be animated...

I was thinking of a crewed VC style bunker with MFDs for propellant tanks, engine parameters, test settings, anything else that would be realistic.

Got most of the runways and buildings/surface tiles done for the base:
http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k207/Notebook_04/10060923-01-42GL-01.jpg

It has a Blue Streak connection of course, thats where the RZ-2 engines were originally tested before the test stands at Spadeadam became available.
http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k207/Notebook_04/Blue Streak/img034.jpg

N.

 

[fort]

wehaveaproblem,

I also turned around this problem for weeks. And I need to declare my mesh / dds in a cfg and not as a ship. I have not found a solution and there is none now I guess.

Nootebook,

If i well understand, you could, maybe, and equally, dépending of your meshe, declare your tile separately in the cfg, not as "ownmaterial" but directly (with, simultaneously, a line for it in base.cfg ), which probably avoided having to search for material values in the list, wich are not in that case necessary and that you can delete in your meshe file, (but can be to adjust however colors of the original image to match the ones on the ground).

BEGIN_OBJECTLIST
MESH
FILE ...themeshe
POS .............
TEX ...thetexture

 

[Notebook]

Thanks fort, I get the feeling of going round in circles with trying to match meshes to surface tiles, but I think thats because I didn't solve the problem!
Basically, the surface tiles will be put back, and the P2 mesh will sit on top with blending to the tiles via an alpha mask.

That's the theory, how it works out is another thing...

N.

 

[fort]

Thanks fort, I get the feeling of going round in circles with trying to match meshes to surface tiles, but I think thats because I didn't solve the problem!
Basically, the surface tiles will be put back, and the P2 mesh will sit on top with blending to the tiles via an alpha mask.

That's the theory, how it works out is another thing...

N.

That's exactly, if i understand, what i'm doing with my nightlights actually and i it works so...

I'll take a minut to reread more precisely your text and i' be back

Edit: if i well understand, the meshe is in 3 D, not a flat meshe ?
Edit2: it's a plane meshe. I think that i've ( and you have ) some solutions
Edit3: if you use the same images for your three meshes that the ones that you use for yours surftiles, with the config i've posted, you should not have to use the material list. The colours of yours images/dds on the meshe will be the same as the surftiles.

I usually texture the meshe in anim8or, in front; add the texture and the materials, and delete ( or do not, it's the same for a texture "out" of the meshe, as in the config i've posted ) the materials later, directly in the meshe.

If the size of your meshes is the same of the one of a surftile under it ( and you can also use the size parameter in your cfg ), you do not really need an alpha chanel. I know that the surftiles are finally trapezoids in an orbiter view and calculate a trapezoidal mesh depends of some trigonometry, but if your surftile, and by the fact, your meshe is not too big - some kilometers or less, the difference will not be really visible at the corners of the surftiles/meshes.

If you use an alpha chanel, make it in DxtBmp for example ( alpha> create alphatemplate ) this from the image of the surftile, and save it, with or without mipmap, in dxt 1 with alpha or 3 or 5 as you like. Later, you can edit this alpha ( DxtBmp and i know that you know this little program ) and make all the modifications on it that you want; on it's borders for example.

Not exactly the same subject but most generally, a little program, to fuse ( blend ? ) the colours of two images. It's free ( only a little mark on the final image )

http://www.mediachance.com/pureimage/index.html

( features: color matching )

 

[Notebook]

Hi again fort, its a 3d mesh, this may make things clearer:

http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k207/Notebook_04/P2_Meshes_2-1.jpg

That is in 3ds Max, the mesh will be modded to make the "embankment" surrounding the test cell as shown in the first link in #2 above.
That mesh goes across three surface tiles, so I'll have to match the bitmaps up, then cut one out to match that mesh, then see how it goes from there.

The object is to get a 3d look to the area, rather than blocks sitting on surface tiles. Don't hold you breath, I'm not the artistic type!

N.

 

[fort]

It's not very easy to understand for me for the reason that my english is really limited.

"...then cut one out to match that mesh..." is not clear for me, not from the point of view of the language, but from the concept. It seems to signify that your 3D meshe, the "embankment", include on it's basis a flat ground, rectangular i suppose, on , or, in, wich one you want to put images taken from the standard surftiles under the meshe, cutted to fit, to be adjusted to, the border of the 3d meshe.

I should have understood that it was more complicated than I imagined, since I know that with the addons you've made, the problem could not simply be a matter of transparency.

Edit: But i think at this moment to: if you want to use parts of the surftiles under the meshe seems to mean that that that ground is not exactly flat. In all ( ? ) others cases you will not have needs for basis surftiles for the reason that the standard surftiles under the meshe should make the ground by themselves.

 

[Notebook]

Hopefully, one picture is worth a few translations?

http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k207/Notebook_04/WestcottP2_East.jpg

That is the mesh in Orbiter, with the surface tiles back in position. My aim is to make a bitmap to fit the mesh, such that it blends with the surface tiles, and makes a "natural" look to the area. Ideally the way Widewake does.
I don't know how to do that yet, which is why you are probably having trouble understanding this!

I suspect a lot of moving vertices and UV mapping to get a smooth transition from ground level to something that looks realistic. Maybe some transparancy as well.

Edit: Fort, just realised this line "I'm trying to replace three surface tiles with bitmapped planes using 3ds Max 5.1." at the very start of thread
is confusing.
That was a means to an end, I was trying to line up the surface tiles in MAX so I could make sure they would match again in Orbiter, after I had lined up the mesh.

The sole object of this is to get a good look to this area in close up. I want to have UMMU and UCGO moving around close to the mesh, and it should look as realistic as I can make it. Especially the "Earthworks" or "Embankments"

Hope this helps, N.

 

[fort]

It was in my mind, re thinking to your image:

http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k2...eak/img034.jpg

...that the ground itsef was certainly in 3 dimensions.

Yes,"...a lot of moving vertices and UV mapping...", i suppose if i've never done that except the "spheric trapezoid" ( i've never know how to name it ) that i've quoted in my first post.

"...a lot of ...UV mapping", depending i think of the quality that you want to obtain and, by the way, this remind me some old topics on the french forum about a Corse 3 D ( that have never been published ) and extreme limit's UV mapping( 2 meters to 50 cm by pixels ), but, on the meshe, the pixels are - big or little - still there:

http://orbiter.dansteph.com/forum/read.php?f=5&i=6558&t=6523&page=-1#reply_6558

http://orbiter.dansteph.com/forum/read.php?f=3&i=27947&t=26871&page=-1#reply_27947

http://orbiter.dansteph.com/forum/read.php?f=5&i=59&t=48&page=-1#reply_59

http://orbiter.dansteph.com/forum/read.php?f=3&i=23020&t=22448&page=-1#reply_23020

 

[wehaveaproblem]

My aim is to make a bitmap to fit the mesh, such that it blends with the surface tiles, and makes a "natural" look to the area. Ideally the way Widewake does.
I don't know how to do that yet,

That bit is suprisingly easy, compared to the lining up and scaling, which you have already done it seems. It just requires you to make a simple alpha bitmap. That being a white texture for the most part, but one that fades through grey to black around the edge. You then simply import that bmp as the alpha layer of the main texture bmp, before exporting as DDS3+ (DDS1 is not alpha capable).

Here's an example. The left half shows the alpha mask for the right hand texture. This will fade out the edges of the main texture until they become completely transparent.

 

[fort]

But if remember some 3D meshes/textures made by Anemasozo, wehaveaproblem, and some others and their experience should be usefull. I do not really know how works Artlav Orulex considering that.

Edit: i forgot to say that with the "trapeze spheric", i've not made uv mapping, by parts. There is only a single image/texture on it.

oh, and: yes, dxt 1 is not alpha greyscale capable.

 

[Notebook]

TO fort:

Thanks for the links fort, my French is non-existent, but I'll go through them. I may have to split the mesh into parts if the uv mapping gets too complex for me.

TO whap:
I did some work with alpha maps on other add-ons, trying to blend surface tiles. Not very succesful, but I got the principle.
As soon as I have to use Paint Shop Pro my output drops to zero, must be an "ART" thing. (I consider making a grey-scale map ART...)

Thanks to both.

N.

 

[fort]

According to my opinion, UV mapping must not be well difficult to achieve. Once the meshe is finished, you go on the site with some brushes and two or three jars of paint and veiled. At last, forget not anyway to take a protection combination. All the ART is there: the combination.

:yes:

 

[Notebook]

Well fort, you haven't seen my greenhouse, that looks like it was painted under a veil

N.

 

[fort]

Veiled. Did i wrote veiled ?
:facepalm:

Oh, my... I wanted to say:voila ( "et voila"; meaning "et ça marche" - but not "that walk" - maybe "it run", or "that make it" - ). People was so much talking about veil here still some weeks ago...

No. Not need to enter in religion I believe, to make UV mapping. At last, I hope.:shifty:

 

[Notebook]

Well, voila may take some time yet...

N.